UniLang Language Community • Forum

This forum is for discussing the ongoing and future projects and resources of UniLang. Please post your comments, criticism and ideas here. We are always trying to expand on things members find useful, helpful, or fun! This is also the place to report errors in systems and resources on the UniLang site.

mōdgethanc wrote:I think if we exclude the weird obscure shit spoken by two hundred people in a remote mountain pass of the Caucasus, the number of languages people really learn (instead of just saying they want to) is fairly small. The vast majority of languages are ones nobody here will ever hear of, and for historical reasons the "market" for languages, so to speak, is extremely Eurocentric.

But it is those obscure ones which people love to add, because they can boast about "interest" to look worldly without ever doing anything with it. For example, I remember two languages being added that only existed between 7 - 9AD. In my view, that list should be for helping people find others who speak the same and for resources. Perhaps some kind of justifications would have to be made, the same as for adding a forum, like more than 2 people showing an interest.

Abavagada wrote: I remember two languages being added that only existed between 7 - 9AD.

What languages were they, and how can a language only exist in three years, two millennia ago?

Chekhov wrote:I don't know about naive worldviews, but Jurgen Wullenwhatever pisses me off to no end because of his extreme pessimism and cynicism. You'd think the world was going to end imminently when talking to that guy.

Abavagada wrote:But it is those obscure ones which people love to add, because they can boast about "interest" to look worldly without ever doing anything with it. For example, I remember two languages being added that only existed between 7 - 9AD. In my view, that list should be for helping people find others who speak the same and for resources. Perhaps some kind of justifications would have to be made, the same as for adding a forum, like more than 2 people showing an interest.

Well, I like some "obscure" languages because I really like them. I never do stuff just to "look worldly".Anyway, what were those two languages?

Viridzen wrote:Well, I like some "obscure" languages because I really like them. I never do stuff just to "look worldly".

But are you seriously learning any of them?

I think it's cool that you like obscure languages and I'ma let you finish, but we don't need to add [X language spoken by 30 people in a rainforest somewhere] just for the sake of one person who might not even be here in three months. (Not referring to you, this is just hyperbole.)

Viridzen wrote:Well, I like some "obscure" languages because I really like them. I never do stuff just to "look worldly".

But are you seriously learning any of them?

I think it's cool that you like obscure languages and I'ma let you finish, but we don't need to add [X language spoken by 30 people in a rainforest somewhere] just for the sake of one person who might not even be here in three months. (Not referring to you, this is just hyperbole.)

That's my point. Is this site about learning or boasting? I would imagine that you would want a language added that you could then add resources for to help yourself and others in learning it and about it, and then even have a reason to create a forum. But just adding languages that you have read about just for the sake of adding them seems useless.

Looking back over the thread, I see I suggested the "other" box a number of times. It is completely up to the admins/developers, I just think that a developer would prefer to put their limited time to something more substantial.

Viridzen wrote:Well, I like some "obscure" languages because I really like them. I never do stuff just to "look worldly".

But are you seriously learning any of them?

I think it's cool that you like obscure languages and I'ma let you finish, but we don't need to add [X language spoken by 30 people in a rainforest somewhere] just for the sake of one person who might not even be here in three months. (Not referring to you, this is just hyperbole.)

Well, if you consider Yiddish, Pennsylvania German, and Picard to be obscure, then yes. Those last two are not even on the list.

Abavagada wrote:I was off about the centuries: 6 and 8 instead of 7 and 9. I meant centuries, not years: 6th and 8th century. Doesn't seem they ever got added, but they were asked for 4 times:Tocharian A and B

As for the Tocharian languages, while I may learn them in the distant future, they're not worth adding to the list. (I'm a little disappointed: I'd hoped that there actually was a language spoken only in three years. To be honest, I actually thought at first it would be some secret society's language.)

Viridzen wrote:As for the Tocharian languages, while I may learn them in the distant future, they're not worth adding to the list.

By what standard are you using to determine what should or shouldn't be added?

Well, they were only spoken for three centuries, they have basically no worthwhile resources, they are basically lost to history, and aren't very well attested (though I could be wrong on this one). I think the list is full of these types of languages already.

I used to wonder about that as well. (See this thread). I wonder whether it would even be possible to somehow say that a language is your "native language" (or heritage language or whatever) without giving it any stars, in case you don't know how to evaluate your proficiency in that language.

That makes it sound like I could put Cree and Italian as that ^^ 'Cause you know, they're the languages of my grandpa and mom's grandparents Not to offend, just something I found funny when I read that. I know you don't know how to call it, so I'm not making fun.

There a couple languages I had wanted added a while ago, but I don't remember what they were . They weren't so obscure and some probably would like them added too, but probably not worth adding anyways even if I remembered…

German and English are my first languages, but I'm not fluent in German.

But what's the use for that? What's the use of making a distinction between a non fluent German speaker who's of German heritage and a non fluent German speaker who's not of German heritage?

Honestly, to me that just looks like a useless thing which has the only purpose of pleasing a few users' vanity.

Not to mention that in many cultures around the world this idea of a "non-fluent native language" doesn't even exist, so with your "non-fluent golden stars" you would probably be misleading for many users and look more competent in a certain language only because of your heritage and not because you really are better at that language.

I speak two languages natively (to me, native: learnt at home from a young age through constant use and immersion, independent of heritage), and I would be in favor of razlem's proposal, but only because I myself can't really say I'm fluent in Pizzonese. I would give it three golden stars if I could.

For my Anki decks, I substitute English for Pizzonese, and I'm constantly having to either ask my grandma or borrow from Italian (I avoid it as much as I can). I know, I shouldn't really do the last thing, but what else am I to do if my grandma doesn't know what a certain word would be?

Aóristos wrote:I speak two languages natively (to me, native: learnt at home from a young age through constant use and immersion, independent of heritage)

But if the result is that you're still not fluent, can you tell me the difference from a person who's not fluent and did not get to learn the language at home from a young age through constant use and immersion? Why should it be important for someone to know that you had that opportunity, if nonetheless you can't speak it fluently?

IpseDixit wrote:But if the result is that you're still not fluent, can you tell me the difference from a person who's not fluent and did not get to learn the language at home from a young age through constant use and immersion? Why should it be important for someone to know that you had that opportunity, if nonetheless you can't speak it fluently?

I assume it's simply about emotions. Although heritage speakers tend to be better at certain areas of the language where learners often have problems. They might have the same overall level, but their strengths and weaknesses aren't the same.

IpseDixit wrote:But if the result is that you're still not fluent, can you tell me the difference from a person who's not fluent and did not get to learn the language at home from a young age through constant use and immersion? Why should it be important for someone to know that you had that opportunity, if nonetheless you can't speak it fluently?

I assume it's simply about emotions. Although heritage speakers tend to be better at certain areas of the language where learners often have problems. They might have the same overall level, but their strengths and weaknesses aren't the same.

Exactly. I know Serbian baby-talk, birthday songs and other elements of the language that are obscure for even most advanced learners, but I've had to approach formal Serbian (news, academic texts, etc.) as if it were a foreign language. It's hard to explain to someone who's not in that situation, but it's rotally different to a real "foreign language", and not just for identity reasons.